HD Graphics 520 vs GeForce GTX 470M SLI

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 470M SLI and HD Graphics 520, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 470M SLI
2010
6.11
+207%

470M SLI outperforms HD Graphics 520 by a whopping 207% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking634939
Place by popularitynot in top-10078
Power efficiencyno data10.22
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Generation 9.0 (2015−2016)
GPU code nameN11E-GTSkylake GT2
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 November 2010 (15 years ago)1 September 2015 (10 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores576192
Core clock speed535 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data900 MHz
Number of transistorsno data189 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm+
Power consumption (TDP)no data15 Watt
Texture fill rateno data21.60
Floating-point processing powerno data0.3456 TFLOPS
ROPsno data3
TMUsno data24

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizelargeno data
Interfaceno dataRing Bus

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4
Maximum RAM amountno data32 GB
Memory bus width192 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1250 MHzSystem Shared
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectorsno dataPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX1112 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-+

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

GTX 470M SLI 6.11
+207%
HD Graphics 520 1.99

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 470M SLI 4070
+215%
HD Graphics 520 1294

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 470M SLI 16802
+194%
HD Graphics 520 5722

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p66
+230%
20
−230%
Full HD79
+618%
11
−618%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 24−27
+420%
5−6
−420%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+280%
5−6
−280%
Fortnite 35−40
+443%
7
−443%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+155%
10−12
−155%
Forza Horizon 5 18−20
+350%
4−5
−350%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+109%
10−12
−109%
Valorant 70−75
+79.5%
35−40
−79.5%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 24−27
+420%
5−6
−420%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
+240%
30
−240%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Dota 2 50−55
+92.3%
26
−92.3%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+280%
5−6
−280%
Fortnite 35−40
+322%
9−10
−322%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+155%
10−12
−155%
Forza Horizon 5 18−20
+350%
4−5
−350%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+633%
3
−633%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+109%
10−12
−109%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+325%
4
−325%
Valorant 70−75
+79.5%
35−40
−79.5%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 24−27
+420%
5−6
−420%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Dota 2 50−55
+127%
22
−127%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+280%
5−6
−280%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+155%
10−12
−155%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+109%
10−12
−109%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+113%
8−9
−113%
Valorant 70−75
+79.5%
35−40
−79.5%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 35−40
+322%
9−10
−322%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
+236%
14−16
−236%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+95%
20−22
−95%
Valorant 65−70
+393%
14−16
−393%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Valorant 30−35
+210%
10−11
−210%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 21−24
+450%
4−5
−450%
Far Cry 5 5−6 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%

This is how GTX 470M SLI and HD Graphics 520 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 470M SLI is 230% faster in 900p
  • GTX 470M SLI is 618% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the GTX 470M SLI is 900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 470M SLI surpassed HD Graphics 520 in all 50 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.11 1.99
Recency 1 November 2010 1 September 2015
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm

GTX 470M SLI has a 207% higher aggregate performance score.

HD Graphics 520, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, and a 186% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 470M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 520 in performance tests.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3 2 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 470M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 3675 votes

Rate HD Graphics 520 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 470M SLI or HD Graphics 520, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.